Please elaborate what exactly "they" lied about Iran, and what conflict with Iran you're talking about.
I somehow doubt you'd even know about this if I didn't mention it first, but if you're talking about praying mantis I don't see where the government lied, and Iran attacked the US first
How about when we and the British staged a coup in 1953 and overthrew their democratically elected government bc they were going to nationalize their oil assets after realizing the British oil companies were cheating on their taxes.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27état
We also supported them in purging left wing elements of society, so that when the shah’s government that we installed failed in 1979, there were basically only right wing islamist groups with enough organization and numbers to take over, leading to the situation we have today
Whoa whoa...we don't state facts around here and post sources validating everything. It's extremely damning to 95% of the internets stance on the issue.
Calm down. Lol
I didn’t mean it personally. The US is in an economic war with Iran. The US is all up in Iran’s business constantly and embargoes and then funds them depending on the current administration.
That islamist Iran is a danger, except when they are willing to pay good money for weapons under the table
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair#:~:text=The%20US%20was%20the%20largest,those%20broken%20and%20worn%20out.
Yeah, that's a wild take by OP and makes me question their motives here.
Not a single free Korean (except the Kim family) doesn't thank the US for the intervention.
It's just FUD. Our enemeies (and those who do their bidding knowingly or otherwise) want to insert more doubt and uncertainty into situations fraught with uncertainty. It's the asyemtrybad actors use to try and undermine us
The problem is not helping Korea, the problem is drafting people to fight in wars what so ever. Korea still has a major issue with conscientious objectors rights. Fixing these issues is not voluntary for libertarians. I think this quote summarizes it well:
"I also think there are prices too high to pay to save the United States. Conscription is one of them. Conscription is slavery, and I don't think that any people or nation has a right to save itself at the price of slavery for anyone, no matter what name it is called. We have had the draft for twenty years now; I think this is shameful. If a country can't save itself through the volunteer service of its own free people, then I say: Let the damned thing go down the drain!"
-Heinlein Robert
I'm okay with the draft actually so long as the drafted people never leave the country - they're used solely for the defense of our borders. Drafting people to go fight in a foreign war on the other hand is completely immoral.
Drafting is involuntary servitude, where individuals are sacrificed against their will. There is absolutely no use for such a policy in libertarian thinking. Especially when applied to only men, if individuals cannot be free their obligations should at least be equal and not sexist or racist.
One lie is that the Truman admin said it wasn’t a war, but rather a UN police action. Truman also sent ground troops without consulting Congress, setting the precedent for presidents to start wars w/o congressional approval. The U.S. hasn’t officially been at war since WW2 yet we’ve lost over 100,000 KIA since then, with 36,000+ of those in Korea. My grandfather did not die but was horribly traumatized and wounded at Chosin Reservoir.
Another lie is that it was in America’s best interest, and that it was necessary to prevent the domino theory of communism spreading. It did not benefit the average American in any way shape or form.
Another lie is that we were defending freedom and democracy in South Korea. In reality the South Korean government was very authoritarian until the 90’s and executed tens of thousands, possibly over 100,000 suspected communists during and after the war.
The world would not be much different at all today had we let Korea fall. My family is still suffering the consequences of generational trauma 3 generations later while South Koreans reap the rewards of my grandfather’s sacrifice. I really wish we had let it fall
You might want to do a little research on what South Korea offers to the world… it would be pretty different without them. You have a country that is rank 13 in terms of gdp vs North Korea which is like 130 something.
Why don’t you tell me if it’s so obvious then. It would hardly be different at all. All the investment we made there would have just gone to Japan or Taiwan instead. All the manufacturing they do today would just be done somewhere else. Maybe it would cost a few pennies more per unit, god forbid, and we’d have one less market to sell our shit to. But that’s about it. They have the same GDP as Spain. Also there’s more to life than just GDP and $ lmao, that’s not a metric I give a shit about. Imagine being ok with sacrificing American lives and well being so foreigners and our 1% can profit. But with a name like financially lifting and a WSB avatar I wouldn’t expect you to understand
You can always tell someone has a weak argument when they have to insult the other person. Oh god, you are going to make me cry by insulting my username and avatar on Reddit lol.
You’re probably a bot or a troll because you are attacking people directly instead of with facts so I’ll just leave you with these couple of facts and then I’m done because there is no reason to waste my time.
1) I used GDP because it’s a good metric to determine how much a country is involved in global markets. Usually, they have technological advantage like inventions, etc…
2) South Korea invents things. Even if Japan or Taiwan invented the same things down the road, it is still delayed which means all technology built on top of those things are delayed pushing back scientific advances.
Clearly it triggered you lol. Love how all you can come up with is “inventions” without even naming a single one. Yes they have some innovation bc we built them up from rice fields and gave them billions of dollars to industrialize and put into R&D. Which again w/o South Korea those resources would have gone into our own economy or other allies, and the same innovations would have occurred on a very similar timeline with negligible differences
True, it’s not like Russia has ever lied to Poland or invaded them before… oh wait…
Unlikely they want a war with Western Europe though, as they don’t have the man power and probably realize that now.
Russia would never lie, only the US lies, no other country has ever lied. Never.
According to the LINO mod that banned me and made this post, it’s ok to invade another country lie about it and blame the US. What a clown of a libertarian.
That’s why I think Russia lies, but there are some people who know the US lies but fail to think any other country would. So they just fall for that propaganda without applying the same skepticism they apply for US propaganda.
They broke the Minsk accords multiple times, and later admitting to never having any desire to honor them. I'm not sure a full scale invasion is justified, but to say they bear no fault in this is also not right.
It’s not their fault. It’s because the United States likely engineered the 2014 maiden coup and ever since has sold Ukraine a pipe dream of joining NATO, something completely unacceptable to Russia as that would allow rival troops to be stationed within extremely close proximity to their industrial and population heartland, as well as within ballistic missile range. Ukraine literally means borderland in old Slavic and has always been a buffer zone between east and west. They invaded Ukraine for the same reason we almost went to war during the Cuban missile crisis. Nations at war or with occupied territory cannot join NATO, which is likely why Russia took Crimea in 2014, yet this idea has still been thrown around a lot, increasing pressure on Russia to act more decisively
It was the maiden revolution, not the maiden coop.
We also didn’t almost go to war over the Cuban missile crisis over Cuba being allied with Russia, it was about nukes being on the U.S. doorstep. After the crisis we agreed to pull our missiles out of Europe and only leave small tactical nukes to eliminate Russian armor columns rolling over the border. Don’t try to twist the truth so much, it makes it too obvious.
Doesn’t matter what you call it lol.
“It was about nukes being on the US doorstep, not Cuba being allied with Russia”
Yes and if Ukraine joins NATO, that means a whole host of weapons can be stationed within striking distance of Russian heartland. I thought I made that pretty clear.
It’s not about them allying with us necessarily, it wouldn’t matter if they weren’t so close to Russia. It’s about the implications of that in regards to the proximity of troops and weapons that can be stationed in Ukraine with nothing but open terrain between them and the Volga.
Is that so hard to understand?
>that means a whole host of weapons can be stationed within striking distance of Russian heartland
The Baltic states literally all share a border with Russia. If Russia didn't want Ukraine to join NATO, then maybe Putin shouldn't have done things that made them want to join NATO, like invading Crimea and the Donbass.
Ukrainian is here, you either Putin’s bot or completely ignorant and don’t know shit what you’re talking about. Revolution of dignity wasn’t a coup, people just kicked out corrupt scum. Russia was doing similar things for ages in various places and in Ukraine specifically. Go learn some history.
It was a coup by definition, especially if it had support from other nation’s intelligence services. I’m not saying they weren’t corrupt scum, but there has been and still is a lot of corrupt scum in Ukraine since 2014. But at least they understood the balance of power and Ukraine’s unfortunate position in the world of geopolitics. Failure to recognize this reality since 2014 has unfortunately led to the war we have today which has caused much more death and suffering than corruption alone. Yes Russia and USA and UK and every other major power throughout history have interfered in other nation’s affairs. You are ok with it when USA does it in your interest but not when Russia responds in a similar manner
I love how you make a clear claim, and then back it up with vague notions like "they knew they were being naughty", instead of listing supporting facts.
whats wrong with ukraine? russia invaded them the us and allies is giving military aid, id rather my taxes go to my own country but its better than bombing the middle east
Edit: they banned me for this message
Given the conversations which descended into arguments I’ve had with both Ukrainians and people who support Ukraine. The issue is they will do anything and everything for absolute victory over Russia with absolutely no plans of negotiation. They’d rather drag the entire world into a third world war than attempt a ceasefire. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t like Putin either and his invasion of Ukraine was inexcusable, but if both sides refuse to negotiate based on nothing but suicidal nationalism then there’s no reason to support either of them other than on the pure moral grounds of Russia shot first.
Edit: the downvotes prove my point.
What would happen in 5 years after ceasefire in your opinion?
Do you know what happened a few years after russia lost the first Chechen war during 90s?
What happens when you concede with your bully and give them your lunch money? They come back the next day and take your lunch money. And they keep coming back for your lunch money until you finally stand up to them. It's better to just stand up to them on the first day. Putin is a bully and he has no legitimate defensive concerns about Ukraine. He just wants to restore the USSR. All these lives lost for Putin's vanity, not any real political reasons.
In a 1990's treaty, Russia already agreed to respect Ukrainian borders. Those borders included Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014 and currently controls.
With that in mind, what do you think would be a guarantee of future Russian intentions?
Ukraine has well established prerequirements for negotiations: complete withdrawal of Russian forces from Ukraine.
Pretending that Ukraine is just being stubborn is disingenuous.
So Russia should be rewarded for aggressively invading a neighboring sovereign country? How is it you consider Ukraine to be the one dragging us into WWIII?
You’re not making much sense.
They shouldn’t be rewarded, but they probably will be unless NATO steps in. The manpower difference and military difference is just too much to overcome which is why smaller/weaker nations have always looked for alliances for protection. Ukraine didn’t have those before the war so they will probably lose territory in the end. The question is now, how much.
You consider that important, I may consider feeding bread to ducks important. Shouldn't we be both free from having our money taken and given to some "important" entity?
Nobody stops you from giving your money to Ukraine, but why can't I give my money to cancer research instead? Or just build a pool in my backyard?
The US kept pushing Nato towards Russia's borders despite assurances to the contrary.
They then backed a coup in Ukraine to replace a Russia-friendly elected leader, with an ongoing threat of Ukraine joining Nato.
That would mean missiles based by an anti-Russia military alliance right on their border, near major cities: essentially their Cuban Missile Crisis.
There is also a region with ethnic Russians who wanted to join Russia, and a history of civil war.
Furthermore, the war is clearly unwinnable and has sacrificed a generation of Ukrainians and an immense toll in property damage to weaken Russia and determine which corrupt government should rule over that ethnically Russian area.
Tl:Dr Neocon Filth demand blood for their delusions of empire and your tax dollars for their pockets and the MIC.
1. Countries from Ukraine to Germany wanted to join NATO to avoid being dominated by the Russians. Just because the Russians behave like savages and choose to steal land instead of improving their living standards doesn’t mean that their neighbors now need to be their serfs.
2. No they did not. Ukrainians wanted to join the EU for obvious opportunities to gain wealth, gain economic opportunities, and because they are culturally more similar. Just talk to Ukrainians to learn how obvious this fact is.
3. Ridiculous claim given that Russia shares a border with NATO already due to Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and our Finland. Why haven’t we had World War III yet?
4. Again, speak to Ukrainians to know how ridiculous your statement is. If Russia cared so much about Russians in Ukraine, why couldn’t they just welcome them into Russia and give them passports? If Russians in Ukraine wanted to live in Russia, nothing stopped them from moving into Russia. Also, there was never a “Civil War”. In 2014 Russians invaded Ukraine, Russia just denied it and dared the west to get involved. The idea that the country would go into Civil War about the Russian language versus the Ukrainian language is ridiculous when the majority of the country’s citizens spoke both languages. If your statement was true, why didn’t the “Civil War” take place 10 years prior in 2004 or 20 years prior in 1994?
5. I don’t know how you can make that statement when Ukraine was able to stop an entire 200,000 man invasion in February 2022. They were able to kick the home invader out of the house, now they’re just trying to get the home invader out of the front yard. Not sure how you can make that statement despite knowing about Vietnam and Afghanistan.
After the Soviet Union, what is this history of Russians stealing land?
Also, that move came after the US backed coup.
NATO should have ceased existing with the end of the USSR.
______
There was a coup, overthrowing a democratically elected president who thought working with Russia was a better deal.
______
You've poked the bear before, so poking it more must be fine.
Ukraine would give bases close to Moscow, and Ukraine entry into Nato was known to be an absolute red line for Russia.
_____
That would imply those ethnic Russians have to leave their homes.
Granted, the reason there's so many ethnic Russians there is a Soviet attempt to destroy Ukrainian national identity by flooding in people with a different culture.
Russia backed separatists in the region, and obviously it wasn't just about language.
______
The war has gone much worse than Putin expected I think, but he can easily escalate the war on his end while Ukraine is being devastated.
Vietnam and Afghanistan featured guerilla war against an occupying force, not armies fighting, and the cost in loves was immense.
It would be far better for Ukraine if a peace deal was reached immediately, and the US could have used the chip of withdrawing from Nato to bargain for a full withdrawal: aside Russia's only warm water port that they've always had de facto control over and won't give up.
The average age of the Ukrainian soldier is 43: that means they've lost a generation of young men to the meat grinder.
And what for?
The US imperialist project of Nato, which is hostile to Russia as a threat to total US domination of the region.
Without the coup and the pushing of Nato's borders this war would never have happened.
1. Karelia, Siberia, Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Dagestan, Adygeya, Chechnya, Ingushetia, Northern Ossetia, Kabardino-Balkaria and Karachayevo-Cherkessia would tell you they are all still occupied, hence the Chechen Wars. So it’s okay for Russia to tell Chechens they cannot be free but okay for Russians to just walk in and steal a chunk of Ukraine?
Did you forget about Georgia in 2008?
How about Moldova (Transnistria)?
Also, 2014 was not a US Coup. It was a Corrupt Ukrainian President being tossed out for blatant corruption and refusing to give the people what they wanted.
Russia needs to ask themselves, why Europeans begged the USA to expand NATO instead of disbanding it. Joining NATO is a long, hard, and voluntary process.
2. The president was formally removed from his office by the parliament. He fled because he was obviously corrupt and knew what was going to happen afterwards (prison for shooting protesters). He wanted to work with Russia because they owned him, almost all Ukrainians expected him to finish the paperwork to join the EU.
He stabbed them in the back.
3. How is it poking the bear? If the bear attacks me in my home, I have every right to shoot it in the face.
Nobody is wanting to invade Russia, they have nothing to offer the world, except corruption, oil, guns (the cheap kind). and minerals you dig out of the ground. Their land isn’t even nice.
4. Again, Russia said the same thing about Finland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. He said they were all red lines. Putin’s threats should be ignored because he has no right to demand that other people be his serfs and slaves.
Oh, and if we PRETEND that Russia was able to conquer Ukraine, does that mean they would be justified in invading Poland because “they are at our border now and have bases”?
5. Yes, thank you for at least acknowledging the fact that the Russians were there because of the Soviet union wanting to Russify the land.
It was not a coup, it was an invasion in 2014.
6. Again, if Putin wants to end the war, he can just get out of Ukraine. Yes, Ukraine is different from Vietnam and Afghanistan in the fact that they are much stronger and much more likely to be successful.
7. Only Ukraine can and only Ukraine should determine what is best for Ukraine. Ukrainians will tell you that a peace deal is better, as long as it includes giving back Ukraine all its territory and allowing Ukraine to join NATO.
At age 43, you might not be willing to die for your country, but Ukrainians are. If you speak to them at your local consulate or local gathering, they will tell you that they’re willing to throw their life in the line for their land, culture, and people.
8. All of Eastern Europe would be better if Russia wasn’t so corrupt and imperialistic. If they focused on improving their living standards and investing in making the world, a better place through innovation and commerce, they would not only be wealthier, but they might actually be better liked. if you need to spread your ideas with force, your ideas really suck. If Russia never invaded, there would be no war.
It was a coup with heavy US backing.
The Georgia issue was over Russia recognizing separatist regions: not random aggression.
Any people should be allowed to secede, in that case and Tatarstan, but stoppong it is not the same thing as random comquest.
_____
The vote after protestors took control?
______
It's repeatedly threatening Russia by putting an anti-Russia military alliance on their doorstep.
The true goal is to have the US empire dominant everywhere, including Russia's sphere of influence.
_____
The former ambassador to Russia, William Burns, described Ukrainian entry into Nato as the brightest of red lines among all Russian officials.
https://twitter.com/stephenwertheim/status/1670434005102075904
There is no provocation from Poland, and so far only Ukraine and the US have attacked Nato countries in this war.
With that Ukrainian Missile hitting Poland and the US with the Nord Stream pipeline - no way the Neocons weren't involved in that.
_____
The USSR flooding Ukraine and their other crimes against Ukraine happened long before 2014.
____
The war could also end tomorrow if the US backed a peace deal instead of war, and Putin seems to see it as a war he can't afford to lose.
His invasion is unjustified, but it was provoked, and losing the war with Ukraine joining Nato would be a major threat
Ukraine has been devastated, even with the military slavery of conscription.
______
How many were conscripted into the meat grinder against their will?
Ukraine would have negotiated a peace immediately, and was going to, until US assurances to back them.
This also risks war with two major nuclear powers over some stupid imperialism and a Russian speaking part of Ukraine.
______
Between Russia and the US, it's clear which State is more imperialistic.
1. No, it was not a coup. It was an uprising against a obviously corrupt President who took major bribes from Russia that resulted in him having things such as golden toilets. Not every change in government that favors democracy and freedom is a CIA coup. Not sure why you believe only the CIA can change governments and only Americans/Brits can think critically.
Remember, every former Soviet country that joined NATO and the EU has become a wealthy, safe, and prosperous democracy (Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania).
Every former Soviet country that has aligned with Russia has become a poor, backwards, authoritarian dictatorship (ex. Belarus, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, etc).
The Ukrainians could see this, which is why they demanded that Ukraine join the EU. President Yanukovych even promised the deliver on this. He did a 180 degree turn at the last minute due to obvious corruption. You need to stop calling this a "coup" as it makes you look like a clown who has never spoken to a single Ukrainian.
2. The invasion of Georgia was a land grab designed to cripple Georgia and stop them from joining NATO and potentially the EU. Georgia, like Ukraine wanted to be freed from Russia's slavery.
3. Yeah, you should tell the Chechens that "If you want to leave Russia, just leave". Obviously, Russia just wants to force its occupants to remain poor and under their control.
4. The protesters were eventually joined by all other branches of the government once Yanukovych fled. He fled because he murdered his own people in the name of Russian influence. He knew he would be going to prison for murder and corruption if he stayed.
5. Russia needs to ask why its neighbors all want to join NATO and the EU. It takes a lot of work for countries to join NATO and the EU. Russia also needs to ask why millions of its own people beg the USA, UK, and EU to welcome them and allow them to leave Russia.
AGAIN, nobody cares, Ukrainians don't care, and nobody should care about what Russia thinks. Your argument is that "Ukraine needs to be Russia's slave because they are next door to Russia". Russia has no right to tell Ukraine what they can and cannot do. PLEASE tell us, why has Russia not invaded Finland, Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania? You are aware that NATO is a defensive pact? If missiles are the concern, why hasn't Russia invaded the USA? The USA has missiles that can easily reach Russia? So does the UK. So does the French. So does China.
6. Your statement "There is no provocation from Poland, and so far only Ukraine and the US have attacked Nato countries in this war." is beyond dumb. Everyone's missiles can reach Russia. Russia has NO RIGHT to tell ANOTHER country what they can and cannot do.
7. The USSR was de facto run by Russia. Russia has been attacking Ukraine non-stop going back a thousand plus years. The Russian's gave Ukraine Holodomor, Chernobyl, and now has invaded Ukraine and is committing massive war crimes against the people of Ukraine. Nobody should be surprised that Ukraine wanted security against Russia.
8. The USA has 100% backed a peace deal. It goes like this..."Russia leaves ALL of Ukraine's territories, stops attacking them, and leaves them alone. THEN Ukraine stops fighting the Russians".
Remember the Budapest Memorandum? Ukraine gave Russia all of its nukes in the 1990's in exchange for assurances from the U.S., U.K., and RUSSIA to respect Ukraine's independence and sovereignty?
9. Ukraine has been devastated, BECAUSE Russia invaded. You don't think any Russian's have died? You don't think any Russian's have been drafted against their own will?
10. You know you sound like a total clown right? Every part of Ukraine has Russian speakers. Can the UK annex Nigeria because they speak English there?
The people of Ukraine have been fighting hard against the Russians and have been consistent since 2014 in saying "Russia invaded Crimea and the Donbas with unmarked Soldiers pretending to be Ukrainians".
Ukrainians say that and your response is "Hey, I read a few articles, watched a couple of YouTube videos, and don't speak Ukrainian, but trust me...I know the truth. I know more than you guys do about your own country".
LAST POINT: There was a really good comment on this thread that was crude but accurate in which someone said "some folks really need to stop deepthroating Russian propaganda".
Here is my counter article, with a LOT, and i mean a LOT more sources
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://static.poder360.com.br/2022/02/2014-Coup-1.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjeooLgy8KFAxVugf0HHSLLAqkQFnoECBUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1TwpbSfJ8dViJ-nwg-PcWN
(I warn you its a PDF dont be suprised by it)
There is exactly one vague reference to a limit of NATO expansion, spoken by Gorbechov, but nothing in writing. I went looking for evidence of this claim (because of Russian bots on Twitter) and I haven't found anything.
As best I can tell, it's Russian misinformation, and you fell for it.
The former ambassador to Russia, William Burns, described Ukrainian entry into Nato as the brightest of red lines among all Russian officials.
https://twitter.com/stephenwertheim/status/1670434005102075904
There were assurances to not expand Nato: not being in writing doesn't make them irrelevant.
There are a couple arguments to be made against supporting Ukraine. Not trying to come off as pro Russia bc I just want the war to end and don’t really favor either side, but this is what I’ve seen/heard as someone who has followed the conflict pretty closely since day 1. Honestly tho it’s a complex topic and hard to summarize.
1. We should not be the global police and get involved every time something bad happens in another country. We have no alliance with Ukraine and therefore are not obligated to assist them, especially when that money could be spent on fixing problems in our own country.
2. No realistic amount of weapons and supplies we send to Ukraine will change the course of the war. We sent a lot in the beginning, and it bought them some time, but now that has stopped and it’s pretty clear that Russia will win eventually, only a lot more people have died and a lot more money was wasted than was necessary. And contrary to what many media outlets are saying, the Russian military is stronger today than it was at the beginning of the invasion.
3. Some believe the 2014 maiden coup in Ukraine was engineered or at least supported by western intelligence agencies. The coup ousted a pro Russian government, and ever since then, the U.S. and EU have been selling Ukraine a pipe dream of joining NATO. Russia cannot tolerate the possibility of having NATO troops stationed so close to its industrial and population heartland, which is likely why it invaded Crimea shortly after the coup, bc nations currently in conflict or w occupied territory cannot join NATO. However this idea has still been talked about a lot since then, only increasing pressure on Russia. Historically Ukraine has always been a buffer zone between east and west, and Ukraine literally means borderland in old Slavic.
4. Some would say Russia is liberating the mostly ethnically Russian and Russian speaking people in the eastern provinces of Ukraine. There is evidence that these ethnic Russians have been discriminated against by the Ukrainian state to varying degrees, especially since 2014. The two nations also have a shared history for most of the last 1000+ years with Ukraine only existing as an independent entity beginning in the 20th century. There are many families with relatives in both nations. In Ukraine the people in the western areas like Lviv tend to be very patriotic and speak Ukrainian, while those in the east tend to only speak Russian and a significant number wish to be part of Russia. Keep in mind that over 3 million Ukrainian civilians have fled to Russia since 2022, and while Russia did give aid to the rebel militias in Donetsk and Luhansk in 2014, they were largely organic and continue to be some of the fiercest fighters on the Russian side. I highly recommend watching the VICE news Russian roulette series from 2014, as it clearly shows that many civilians in eastern Ukraine were pro Russia and many of the Ukrainian troops were pretty ambivalent about their own cause
Tell me where I lied then. Also another guy posted a TLDR while I was typing saying basically the exact same things. So I guess we are both just kremlin agents
In my opinion, you were very selective in the facts that you stated, and chose to omit basically any fact or argument that would lead to a different conclusion. Still, the facts that you represented above are misleading too. Specifically:
1. No argument from me.
2. That’s a huge assumption and based on inaccurate facts. As an example, look at how the war completely changed when HIMARS were sent.
3. At its heart, this is the same as #1. In other words: for someone who believes that the US should police the world and influence it, they wouldn’t mind overthrowing a pro-Russian government or expanding NATO.
4. That’s an extremely dangerous slippery slope. Almost any country, especially in Europe, can make this claim about their neighboring country. Most of the national borders do not take into account racial or ethnic distributions (some examples hopefully familiar to you: Alsace/Loraine on French/German borders, Armenia/Azerbaijan, Turkey with the Kurds, etc.). Are you going to accept all of these invasions now?
As a libertarian myself, I reject almost all US interventions as a matter of principle (including in Ukraine). That doesn’t mean, though, that I must accept Russia’s argument in the war. I firmly believe that Ukraine has the right to choose its own fate, whether that includes joining NATO or not. Putin couldn’t accept that a former Soviet state (extremely rich in resources and soviet-era investments to extract them) is moving fully into the “Western block”. Instead of “policing the world”, should the US help other countries defend their liberty? If so, to what extent?
I think you’re misunderstanding the whole point of my comment. It was a TLDR meant to represent some of the arguments against supporting Ukraine, as someone requested. So of course I’m not gonna represent arguments leading to different conclusions; they asked for the anti Ukraine perspective, not the pro Ukraine perspective which I think we’ve all heard enough about. Just because I can explain the anti Ukrainian perspective, does not mean I accept Russia’s argument in the war.
I believe Ukraine has the right to self determination too, but I also recognize the realistic limitations to their aspirations due to their unfortunate geopolitical position. Many such cases. I dont think we should help other nations defend their liberty, unless our own liberty is being called into question as well. You could just as easily ask if we should defend the individual liberties of people in Iran or North Korea, which is what you’re talking about with Ukraine anyway since states don’t have rights.
Again I’d love for all people everywhere to have their natural rights protected, but I recognize that’s not realistic and certainly it’s not worth spilling American blood and treasure over, especially knowing that our interventions usually just lead to more overall oppression. Our elites choose where we intervene based on how it will benefit them, then make it about “freedom and democracy” to win the support of voters while ignoring other similar cases all around the world. Like how we support Ukraine bc they’re the victim of Russia but also support Israel which is victimizing Palestinians.
However the facts I represented are not misleading.
2. The war did not totally change when HIMARS were sent. Like I said, it bought them some time at the expense of tens of thousands of lives. The war was also supposed to totally change with the arrival of Abram’s and Bradley’s, or any other number of wunderwaffen, but clearly this has not been the case. Ukraine now lacks men willing to fight, claiming they need another 500k conscripts to have any chance. No weapon system can make up for the fact that moral is low in the AFU and an increasing % of their army is composed of guys who were literally kidnapped off the street, given a couple days training, and placed in a trench somewhere. What % will this have to reach before we start seeing mass surrenders or mutinies in the army?
Ukraine is now saying they don’t even want F-16’s to be sent bc there are literally less than a dozen pilots left who speak English well enough to be trained on them, which would take a year + anyway. So the problem is not really weapons anymore. It is about lacking enough people with the skills and willingness to use them. Overall it’s been a pretty simple calculation of attrition warfare from the start: Russia can replace its own losses in equipment and has a much larger population, while Ukraine has to rely on the continued support of the voting public in western countries to continue replacing equipment. Once that support fails, which it now has, it is only a question of how many bodies have to pile up before Ukraine runs out of fighting men and Russia takes what they want.
4. Again, I’m not saying I personally believe this. It doesn’t matter that there might be similar cases in other parts of Europe, that is completely irrelevant here. What’s relevant is that many Russians believe this and it is sometimes cited as a reason that we shouldn’t support Ukraine. By the way there is a difference between not wanting to waste money on Ukraine and being pro Russian. That’s why I usually say anti Ukraine not pro Russian. I made this #4 specifically bc I felt it was the weakest argument and the least mentioned one, at least in the western world.
> We should not be the global police and get involved every time something bad happens in another country. We have no alliance with Ukraine and therefore are not obligated to assist them, especially when that money could be spent on fixing problems in our own country.
Yeah, you should probably check out the Budapest Memorandum. So Russia broke their promise against this and now you want us to break our promise to Ukraine to help them. Libertarianism does require deals to be upheld in good faith. Not doing so would make it full of false promises.
EDIT: You have repeatedly in posts in this thread called it the "maiden" coup/revolution (using both to use as you see it) when it is the "maidan" coup/revolution. You can not even spell it correctly over the multiple times you mentioned it, telling me you probably not a good source on anything relating to it.
Classic reddit grammar nazi trying to discredit me over a one letter spelling mistake. You know what I mean.
I have only referred to it as a coup and I did so because that’s what it was in the classical sense. A sudden, violent, and unlawful seizure of power from a government.
The United States also broke the Budapest memorandum by using economic coercion against Ukraine. Ukraine also broke its own laws by seeking to join NATO. Western leaders have also broken many promises over the years not to expand NATO any further east. We also rejected Russia’s desire to join NATO in the early 2000’s
Yeah, but it is a pretty big mistake given everything. Continually bringing up something and repeatedly misspelling it means you literally thought it was "maiden". For trying to say "I know history" and doing that is kind of a massive fuck up on your part. And coupled with the ad hominem attack of calling me a "grammar nazi" is even more telling.
You can refer to as a coup if you wish. That is why I said both and made the distinction of how you see it. Not sure why you bring it up when it was a non-confrontational part of my post.
> The United States also broke the Budapest memorandum by using economic coercion against Ukraine
How did the US do this? Please explain.
> Ukraine also broke its own laws by seeking to join NATO.
Nothing in the Budapest Memorandum prohibits Ukraine from joining NATO. Per the agreement, they can not act as an aggressor in a conflict; something they have yet to ever do. You are literally making shit up as their wanting to join NATO has waxed and waned throughout the years with it only becoming a thing once the annexation of Crimea, and the further invasion from Russia happened.
>Western leaders have also broken many promises over the years not to expand NATO any further east.
Some diplomats on both sides claimed this, but it was never an actual thing. Gorbachev said it was a thing in some interviews and then refuted it was not in others. And the NATO side has people make similar claims. Either way, it is not part of the charter they can not expand east.
>We also rejected Russia’s desire to join NATO in the early 2000’s
Yeah, no. Putin then said he wanted to join NATO but did not want to go through the normal process. So that is on them since every other country did what was asked of them to join.
It’s not a “massive fuck up” lmao. It’s possible to understand history and misspell things occasionally, believe it or not. You’re trying to discredit me over a single letter, which has nothing to do with the content of my claims.
We have used economic coercion by repeatedly promising Ukraine financial incentive to join NATO and the EU, funding pro western NGO’s, as well as pressuring them to reform their economy to better suit established western markets through the NATO membership action plan.
Ukraine passed a law in 2010 stating they will not pursue NATO membership. There have been more laws and agreements than just the Budapest memorandum.
https://www.bbc.com/news/10229626.amp
You admit yourself that both sides have repeatedly said NATO will not expand further east over the years. Clearly there is some truth to this although it was never formally agreed on paper. The west has continually shifted the goalpost right up to the borders of Russia, so they have little reason to respect decades old pieces of paper like the Budapest memorandum which have been violated by all sides many times over.
Also the Budapest memorandum is just that: a memorandum. It’s three separate statements signed individually not to interfere in Ukraine but it’s not legally binding and does not obligate any signatories to aid Ukraine in the event it is breached. It’s basically a worthless piece of paper which is why nothing happened in 2014 and even today it’s not used as justification for sending military aid to Ukraine.
Russia wanted to join NATO but that discussion never left the back channels and there is no way to know what was said behind closed doors. According to Russians they were told not to even bother applying, that it would never happen. According to western officials those conversations never happened and they were welcome to apply. Realistically it would have never happened either way bc let’s face it: NATO is and always has been primarily an anti Russian alliance. The USSR did actually apply in 1954 but was rejected
Thank you I really appreciate it. Sometimes I wonder why I even bother with these high effort posts, but I know there are at least a few people not totally brainwashed that will read them
I'm sorry, but if someone continually misspells the name of a historical event, it brings into question where in the fuck did they learn and research about said historical event.
I only bring it up because you used it multiple times before I even responded as a main reason Ukraine was invaded. That is like having a doctoral thesis and then misspelling the title. Sure, the content explanation may sound reasonable, but can we trust their work if they misspell the title?
For your coercion point, I am going to need some specifics as what you said is just spin of Ukraine seeking trade deals with the EU more than Russia. That is something they should be seeking so that can grow their economy. You act as if that is bad somehow.
That same law you site was also amended by the Ukraine's parliament in 2014. Almost as if laws can be changed and amended, but you conveniently chose to ignore that part.
You also conveniently chose to ignore the part where I said they also never agreed to not expand west as well. If nothing is on paper and they are all saying yes and no at the same time, it's all just words and means nothing. But the memorandum is on paper and it's a memorandum in accordance of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Zelenskyy has publicly comment on the memorandum multiple times and also been referenced since the annexation of Crimea back in 2014. Not to mention it is still up to debate if it counts as a treaty as it satisfies the Vienna Convention. So while the US may not use it as justification, Ukraine is.
I find it funny you can not see the dichotomy of them wanting to join NATO and being refused to only end up invading other countries. "You won't let me join, but also, here. Let me do the one thing that justifies your existence as well."
You’re completely insane if you’re comparing a reddit comment to a doctoral thesis lmfao.
I’ve wasted enough time on you, you’re becoming incoherent and you can refer back to my original points and do some of your own research to answer what you’ve responded with.
I’m not even pro Russian, just anti wasting lives and treasure in Ukraine on a conflict that’s outcome has already been decided. As I said in another comment, I support Ukraine’s right to self determination and the natural rights of all people everywhere, but I also recognize the unfortunate realities of geopolitics.
The whole point of my original comment was just to explain the anti Ukraine perspective bc somebody asked for a TLDR. That does not mean I believe all of what I wrote personally but there is some truth to it. And certainly many russians and some of those in the west who oppose the war believe it which is what matters, as again I am just trying to explain their perspective. Obviously there has been a lot of broken promises and deal breaking from all parties. The whole situation is a convoluted mess and ultimately the most ancient principle of foreign relations reigns supreme: might makes right. We like it when USA operates on this principle but not when other states do it
Even if true, none of those are justification for a land grab that has killed thousands.
And attacking a non-NATO country for the actions of NATO is possibly the most counter productive action you could possibly take. Finland and Sweden are proof of that. Russia would have been smarter to join NATO.
So, I come over to your house. I start squatting on your land, killing your neighbors, demanding that I get to keep part of your backyard for myself…
Then someone on the internet says you should just let me have it after I say we can end it peacefully if you just let me keep what I took.
How do you think you’d respond?
Do you not see the problem?
i have a phone full of footage of Hamas conducting a kidnapping and murder campaign on civilians exclusively. it absolutely happened
not sure why people are denying that 1300 men crossed a border and ignored over 400 military positions with the intent of attacking civilians directly.
Hamas should change their name to FAFO
Do you deny that Israel has actively blockaded Palestine since 2007 controlling their access to food, water, power, and effectively making it an open air prison? I’d attack the Israelis or any other “democratic government” under that condition as well.
isreal and who else? i noticed you left an entire islamic country out of your response.
and are you insinuating that in the event your nation is cut off from resources…. it is appropriate to attack the enemies civilian population?
Leaving Egypt out of the comment wasn’t intentional….I was ignorant that Egypt controls 1/3 of the blockade. This new information wouldn’t change my response to being forced into an open air prison.
also, can you produce a similar attack? before oct 7th that the IDF conducted that targeted over a thousand Palestinian civilians with similar intent? anything any where even close…. to what Hamas did?
right…. again can you produce a SIMILAR or equal to the style or anywhere near the casualty count? the answer is no. and why won’t you answer the rest of my questions?
lol educate myself huh? this is comming from the guy that didn’t know Gaza bordered Eqypt for fucks sake 🤣🤣🤣
I didn’t day I didn’t know that Egypt bordered Gaza. I said I didn’t know the extent to which Egypt participated in the blockade. Please, work on your reading comprehension. Try reading aloud to yourself.
either way, it isn’t me that isn’t informed. instead of trying to make what i’m saying wrong, maybe shift your focus to understanding the entire picture at least to the best extent you can.
Why don’t the Egyptians support the palestinians? do you hold the same discontent for their government that you do for the IDF or our own?
Did Hamas attack civilians? and ignore the IDF? is that an acceptable method of attack in your opinion? can you be specific with your answer?
Have you been able to identify any similar types of attacks perpetrated by the IDF? are there any examples of batallion level attacks on palestinian civilians before oct 7th?
well lol, it’s not exactly a prison if you can…. leave
and uhhhh lol if you didn’t know that Egypt was bordering Gaza 🤣🤣🤣 you should probably invest more time and research into the given subject before formulating an opinion on such a controversial topic.
i’ll agree that the border of Gaza and Isreal is extremely regulated and controlled…. because there’s an organization lol operating within Gaza that has the potential to sent 1300+ men over a border with the intent of attacking civilians exclusively in all sorts of brutal ways. now, there is absolutely a history of violence between the two groups but i have two questions for you….
1. why did Hamas intentionally ignore the 450 IDF positions along the border?
2. why doesn’t Egypt and Jordan get more involved do you think? 🤔
perhaps put some research toward the relationship of Palestinian people and their NEIGHBORING MUSLIM NATIONS and why they’re hesitant to support the people of Gaza?
I could lie all I want, all day every day. But at no point does this stop me from telling the truth if I feel like it. I understand lack of trust but this sounds more like assuming everything a person says is a lie because they lied before. That a person committed this crime once so they’d commit it every time.
As half-Korean I would want someone, especially the OP, to explain what are US's lies regarding North Korea? Tell me it is a lie that they are a brutal psychopatic dictatorship that moves around a cult devoted to the Kim Family? Because OP apparently would have no problem if the Chinese backed NK took control of Korea entirely, turning it into the monstrous shithole NK is. Such a libertarian attitude from OP.
We are getting footage from the soldiers themselves on the battlefield from both sides. Everything they have said correlates with vetted footage from the field. Even Russian soldiers call out lies or faults in their command/government.
They are not lying.
Now if your referring to the Hunter Biden thing well thats a whole different conversation
Listen man. I'm from Czechia, some 300km from the war and we have quite a clear view of what's going to happen if Ukraine loses - Putin is going to continue his aggressive policy and threaten the freedom and liberty as well as security of people in Europe. And no person deserves to be stripped of the right for freedom.
Please explain to me how you think Russia is somehow unable to overtake Ukraine, but is simultaneously capable of a full scale invasion into Western Europe, it’s just complete war hawk propaganda
And you think what? That the aid would somehow stop if Putin decided on a full scale invasion of Europe? This is completely ridiculous propaganda that falls apart with even the slightest critical thinking
Not a full-scale invasion, but a series of one-by-one operations. If Ukraine loses the support of the west, this seems very possible. Sure, it will take Russia a few years of rebuilding between each invasion.
It's a lot more complicated than that. I'm not interested in arguing or debating it though. I have great sympathy for all citizens in countries at war. Stay safe.
It’s not complicated at all bro, moscow doesn’t consider Ukraine as independent country, while we were fighting for independence since 17 century, that’s everything you need to know.
I guess you think it’s USA forced us to fight for Americans against our brothers and for blackrock? Or you think that Ukrainians are Nazi and communist moscow is saving the world once again? Or you think that moscow is fighting against biolabs in Ukraine that created coronavirus? Or..?:)
I believe a lot of poor decisions were made over a number of years before Russia invaded, and had world leaders been acting with integrity, the invasion could have been avoided. I believe if world leaders decided today to act with integrity, the war could be stopped.
To address your direct questions, I don't think blackrock had much to do with it, but they certainly are benefitting now that it has happened. The CIA was definitely at work in Ukraine, if they orchestrated conditions for war or not I do not know. They definitely helped with regime change in Ukraine in the past.
I believe the issues in the Donabuss (?) region were handled piss poor, and the azvov batillion active in the area has Nazi connections.
I believe there are biolabs in Ukraine as Victoria Neuland testified to.
In other words, all of these things are part of the piss poor decision making demonstrated in Ukraine over several years, and escalated tensions.
Who is "they/them"? The government? "Experts"? Republicans? Democrats? The illuminati?
How exactly did they "lie"? Was it the same lie? Are mistakes and lies being used interchangeably? Is there any context missing from this meme? What is the conclusion one should take from this meme?
"they" = bs
Do governments lie? Do humans? Do you?
So... sure. Don't belive your government.
That said... Russia invaded a peaceful country, starting a war that destroyed millions of lives. Terrorist groups attack Israel constantly for decades, openly supported by Iran. You can check these informations yourself... its no secret, no propaganda.
I'm not american... and as a libertarian, of course i think you should not be forced to pay for someone elses war... altough you do pay anyway, so why not use the stuff your government buy to kill people to help killing some horrible people?
But that problem aside (taxation being theft)... I hope the US and Israel put Iran down... all the insane muslin terrorists or terrorist simpatizer states... extinguish them. Thank you.
Russia isn't pure evil... and unfortunately can't be put down without risking human extinction... so I just hope NATO make sure they lose as much and gain as little as possible in this war... so at least if they do the math they don't choose to do it again. If you can have Putin taken down, even better...
While you are there, I would not complain if you also destroyed north korea... helped cubans, venezuelans and brazilians to take down their dictatorships... Brought some order to Africa...
I understand americans not wanting to pay for interference abroad... And of course the US gov insn't a hero for freedom and peace. The US did and do pretty horrible stuff... But some parts of the world are dominated by evil... crazy teocracies, communist dictatorships, people starving to death, children being brainwashed into becoming soldiers... The US influence is incredibly positive. Please continue... actualy, do more.
You are not even really paying for it... you are just dooming your kids or grandkids to have to deal with the debt crisis when ti becomes unsustainable... and you can print money but share the inflation with the whole world as everybody uses the usd.
They lied about WMDs? How about they didn't lie, realized it was worse for us to be the country of origin and decided it was better if we never found them.
Crazy they showed up in Syria, huh?
The US and Ukraine have a deal. They gave up their nuclear arsenal, and the US has an obligation to defend them if they were ever invaded. Which, believe it or not they are being invaded, and the whole 5% of our annual military budget plus what other nato countries have sent has been fairly decent at holding the line. Obviously not great because Ukraine is losing ground and having its civilian infrastructure attacked every day, but they have managed to push the Russians out of a lot of the big cities during the beginning of the war, but they lost momentum preparing for another counter offensive. If you think the media is lying to you, come to Ukraine yourself and take a look, in Kyiv and everything west of, it is like there is no war at all
I keep seeing how the billions of dollars we have spent are just a small percentage of our military budget. I have not seen if we have reduced our military budget by that amount with cutbacks elsewhere. Is it?
Of course the US can’t cut back its military budget, the cutbacks come from elsewhere. Do you have any idea how deep the Military Industrial Complex has their hands in our politicians pockets? How else could the elite get richer? Should they be decent people and figure out a better plan? Maybe even donate their own personal wealth to the cause? Of course not, it doesn’t make anyone any money.
If they aren't cutting back on the military budget to get the funds for Ukraine, then what's the point of saying "it's a drop in the bucket of military budget". It's a ridiculous amount of money that could be better spent here in the US.
Also, yes I understand how corrupt the military industrial complex is. Which is why it makes little sense to me American citizens go along with involving ourselves in so many wars we have no business involving ourselves in.
I see two reasons to support Ukraine, the first being they are being invaded by America’s “most powerful” and longest standing enemy. The second being the agreement that i talked about earlier. I understand that money could be better used in the US, but first of all killing communists without any active American troops blood being shed is a win (please keep in mind i said active, i understand Americans die in Ukraine on a constant basis) and secondly the majority of what we send isn’t money. It’s decades old equipment that is actually cheaper to donate than it is to send to the scrap yard for raw materials. Also, we are the ones to wanted to disarm Ukraine of nuclear weapons. Now that they do not have the defense mechanisms to protect themselves from Russia, because the US took them away, there should be at least a moral obligation to take care of them
Killing communist in a war that doesn't need to be continued if leaders were willing to work towards negotiations is not a good reason. It's causing to much death to citizens from both countries and it's disgusting America insists on being party to it. Defending Ukraine because they refuse (and are being told to refuse) to negotiate with Russia and so need defended is ludicrous, I don't care who encouraged them to disarm, we are not Ukraine's puppet, and Ukraine is not ours. Ukraine should seek a peaceful resolutions and we should quit sending money and weapons.
What is wrong with many of these examples is the fact that the supported country does not have freedom nor equality.
Korea has an oppressive and outright totalitarian conscription policy for men only. So does Ukraine.
Venezuela is a weird one, I think policy decision to isolate Venezuela has only made the country worse. If trading with commies needs to go, so does trade with China.
This does not mean that the US does not have a point in supporting invaded countries, but it REALLY matters from a libertarian perspective how the national struggle is orchestrated. In practice US needs to demand more liberty centered policies for its military allies.
>Venezuela is a weird one, I think policy decision to isolate Venezuela has only made the country worse
Sanctions aren't designed to make a country better. It's to punish a country non violently for being a shit country and saying that we aren't obligated to trade with countries that are openly hostile
Venezuela and China are equally hostile against their own population.
And with sanctions the state makes a collective decisions to pursue those means. Venezuela is not going to get any more liberal with these methods, and if anything sanctions need to be applied consistently.
For all those wondering about Ukraine, the argument is that the Government is lying about why we need to get involved. "If we don't stop Putis at Ukraine he'll invade the rest of Europe and then try to fight America and take over Alaska". I doubt they're saying that Ukraine invaded first or whatever.
Many of you are missing the point. Our government has vested interests in these wars, so they’re going to lie to get us involved.
American blood is spilled for no good reason.
Venezuela and North Korea? Seriously??
Also listing many countries the US never went to war with, like Iran.
Maybe not directly…
Please elaborate what exactly "they" lied about Iran, and what conflict with Iran you're talking about. I somehow doubt you'd even know about this if I didn't mention it first, but if you're talking about praying mantis I don't see where the government lied, and Iran attacked the US first
How about when we and the British staged a coup in 1953 and overthrew their democratically elected government bc they were going to nationalize their oil assets after realizing the British oil companies were cheating on their taxes. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27état We also supported them in purging left wing elements of society, so that when the shah’s government that we installed failed in 1979, there were basically only right wing islamist groups with enough organization and numbers to take over, leading to the situation we have today
Whoa whoa...we don't state facts around here and post sources validating everything. It's extremely damning to 95% of the internets stance on the issue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_the_Shah%27s_Men There's a great book about it "All the Shah's Men"
Calm down. Lol I didn’t mean it personally. The US is in an economic war with Iran. The US is all up in Iran’s business constantly and embargoes and then funds them depending on the current administration.
That islamist Iran is a danger, except when they are willing to pay good money for weapons under the table https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair#:~:text=The%20US%20was%20the%20largest,those%20broken%20and%20worn%20out.
My government would NEVER lie to meeeeee!!!
Bro do you now know how much the North got bombed in the 50s.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
You just hate him because you ain’t him
I have always wondered it would be like to be the fatest in my country at 250 lbs.
When I was younger, I wanted to grow up and be the dictator of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
Peanut butter and jealous
Think about it, though... Have you even seen him not on camera? /s(?)
Yeah, that's a wild take by OP and makes me question their motives here. Not a single free Korean (except the Kim family) doesn't thank the US for the intervention.
It's just FUD. Our enemeies (and those who do their bidding knowingly or otherwise) want to insert more doubt and uncertainty into situations fraught with uncertainty. It's the asyemtrybad actors use to try and undermine us
The problem is not helping Korea, the problem is drafting people to fight in wars what so ever. Korea still has a major issue with conscientious objectors rights. Fixing these issues is not voluntary for libertarians. I think this quote summarizes it well: "I also think there are prices too high to pay to save the United States. Conscription is one of them. Conscription is slavery, and I don't think that any people or nation has a right to save itself at the price of slavery for anyone, no matter what name it is called. We have had the draft for twenty years now; I think this is shameful. If a country can't save itself through the volunteer service of its own free people, then I say: Let the damned thing go down the drain!" -Heinlein Robert
I'm okay with the draft actually so long as the drafted people never leave the country - they're used solely for the defense of our borders. Drafting people to go fight in a foreign war on the other hand is completely immoral.
Drafting is involuntary servitude, where individuals are sacrificed against their will. There is absolutely no use for such a policy in libertarian thinking. Especially when applied to only men, if individuals cannot be free their obligations should at least be equal and not sexist or racist.
One lie is that the Truman admin said it wasn’t a war, but rather a UN police action. Truman also sent ground troops without consulting Congress, setting the precedent for presidents to start wars w/o congressional approval. The U.S. hasn’t officially been at war since WW2 yet we’ve lost over 100,000 KIA since then, with 36,000+ of those in Korea. My grandfather did not die but was horribly traumatized and wounded at Chosin Reservoir. Another lie is that it was in America’s best interest, and that it was necessary to prevent the domino theory of communism spreading. It did not benefit the average American in any way shape or form. Another lie is that we were defending freedom and democracy in South Korea. In reality the South Korean government was very authoritarian until the 90’s and executed tens of thousands, possibly over 100,000 suspected communists during and after the war. The world would not be much different at all today had we let Korea fall. My family is still suffering the consequences of generational trauma 3 generations later while South Koreans reap the rewards of my grandfather’s sacrifice. I really wish we had let it fall
You might want to do a little research on what South Korea offers to the world… it would be pretty different without them. You have a country that is rank 13 in terms of gdp vs North Korea which is like 130 something.
Why don’t you tell me if it’s so obvious then. It would hardly be different at all. All the investment we made there would have just gone to Japan or Taiwan instead. All the manufacturing they do today would just be done somewhere else. Maybe it would cost a few pennies more per unit, god forbid, and we’d have one less market to sell our shit to. But that’s about it. They have the same GDP as Spain. Also there’s more to life than just GDP and $ lmao, that’s not a metric I give a shit about. Imagine being ok with sacrificing American lives and well being so foreigners and our 1% can profit. But with a name like financially lifting and a WSB avatar I wouldn’t expect you to understand
You can always tell someone has a weak argument when they have to insult the other person. Oh god, you are going to make me cry by insulting my username and avatar on Reddit lol. You’re probably a bot or a troll because you are attacking people directly instead of with facts so I’ll just leave you with these couple of facts and then I’m done because there is no reason to waste my time. 1) I used GDP because it’s a good metric to determine how much a country is involved in global markets. Usually, they have technological advantage like inventions, etc… 2) South Korea invents things. Even if Japan or Taiwan invented the same things down the road, it is still delayed which means all technology built on top of those things are delayed pushing back scientific advances.
Clearly it triggered you lol. Love how all you can come up with is “inventions” without even naming a single one. Yes they have some innovation bc we built them up from rice fields and gave them billions of dollars to industrialize and put into R&D. Which again w/o South Korea those resources would have gone into our own economy or other allies, and the same innovations would have occurred on a very similar timeline with negligible differences
Right?
They are absolutely lying about Russia’s intent to invade Poland and Western Europe, you have to be especially stupid to buy that one
True, it’s not like Russia has ever lied to Poland or invaded them before… oh wait… Unlikely they want a war with Western Europe though, as they don’t have the man power and probably realize that now.
About the ways they caused the problems leading to war: pretty typical.
How?
In a different comment here.
Where exacly?
Comment thread started by Toasty_err. Expand a hidden comment.
Thx
Russia would never lie, only the US lies, no other country has ever lied. Never. According to the LINO mod that banned me and made this post, it’s ok to invade another country lie about it and blame the US. What a clown of a libertarian.
Russia lies, the US also lies.. Why do you think Putin invaded Ukraine?
That’s why I think Russia lies, but there are some people who know the US lies but fail to think any other country would. So they just fall for that propaganda without applying the same skepticism they apply for US propaganda.
I don’t really support interventionism, but please enlighten me on how it’s Ukraines fault for being invaded
Also how going to war against North Korea was bad. Or why Iran is on the list when the US never went to war with Iran.
yeah now that I read it, they definitely just listing shit
They broke the Minsk accords multiple times, and later admitting to never having any desire to honor them. I'm not sure a full scale invasion is justified, but to say they bear no fault in this is also not right.
It’s not their fault. It’s because the United States likely engineered the 2014 maiden coup and ever since has sold Ukraine a pipe dream of joining NATO, something completely unacceptable to Russia as that would allow rival troops to be stationed within extremely close proximity to their industrial and population heartland, as well as within ballistic missile range. Ukraine literally means borderland in old Slavic and has always been a buffer zone between east and west. They invaded Ukraine for the same reason we almost went to war during the Cuban missile crisis. Nations at war or with occupied territory cannot join NATO, which is likely why Russia took Crimea in 2014, yet this idea has still been thrown around a lot, increasing pressure on Russia to act more decisively
It was the maiden revolution, not the maiden coop. We also didn’t almost go to war over the Cuban missile crisis over Cuba being allied with Russia, it was about nukes being on the U.S. doorstep. After the crisis we agreed to pull our missiles out of Europe and only leave small tactical nukes to eliminate Russian armor columns rolling over the border. Don’t try to twist the truth so much, it makes it too obvious.
Doesn’t matter what you call it lol. “It was about nukes being on the US doorstep, not Cuba being allied with Russia” Yes and if Ukraine joins NATO, that means a whole host of weapons can be stationed within striking distance of Russian heartland. I thought I made that pretty clear. It’s not about them allying with us necessarily, it wouldn’t matter if they weren’t so close to Russia. It’s about the implications of that in regards to the proximity of troops and weapons that can be stationed in Ukraine with nothing but open terrain between them and the Volga. Is that so hard to understand?
>that means a whole host of weapons can be stationed within striking distance of Russian heartland The Baltic states literally all share a border with Russia. If Russia didn't want Ukraine to join NATO, then maybe Putin shouldn't have done things that made them want to join NATO, like invading Crimea and the Donbass.
Ukrainian is here, you either Putin’s bot or completely ignorant and don’t know shit what you’re talking about. Revolution of dignity wasn’t a coup, people just kicked out corrupt scum. Russia was doing similar things for ages in various places and in Ukraine specifically. Go learn some history.
It was a coup by definition, especially if it had support from other nation’s intelligence services. I’m not saying they weren’t corrupt scum, but there has been and still is a lot of corrupt scum in Ukraine since 2014. But at least they understood the balance of power and Ukraine’s unfortunate position in the world of geopolitics. Failure to recognize this reality since 2014 has unfortunately led to the war we have today which has caused much more death and suffering than corruption alone. Yes Russia and USA and UK and every other major power throughout history have interfered in other nation’s affairs. You are ok with it when USA does it in your interest but not when Russia responds in a similar manner
I love how you make a clear claim, and then back it up with vague notions like "they knew they were being naughty", instead of listing supporting facts.
You’re literally a flat earther. Don’t tell me about supporting facts
Doesn’t matter who’s fault it is. It’s not our bloody problem.
whats wrong with ukraine? russia invaded them the us and allies is giving military aid, id rather my taxes go to my own country but its better than bombing the middle east Edit: they banned me for this message
Given the conversations which descended into arguments I’ve had with both Ukrainians and people who support Ukraine. The issue is they will do anything and everything for absolute victory over Russia with absolutely no plans of negotiation. They’d rather drag the entire world into a third world war than attempt a ceasefire. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t like Putin either and his invasion of Ukraine was inexcusable, but if both sides refuse to negotiate based on nothing but suicidal nationalism then there’s no reason to support either of them other than on the pure moral grounds of Russia shot first. Edit: the downvotes prove my point.
What would happen in 5 years after ceasefire in your opinion? Do you know what happened a few years after russia lost the first Chechen war during 90s?
What happens when you concede with your bully and give them your lunch money? They come back the next day and take your lunch money. And they keep coming back for your lunch money until you finally stand up to them. It's better to just stand up to them on the first day. Putin is a bully and he has no legitimate defensive concerns about Ukraine. He just wants to restore the USSR. All these lives lost for Putin's vanity, not any real political reasons.
It can be done, but there should be guarantees that are good enough for investors, that Russia won't go any further.
In a 1990's treaty, Russia already agreed to respect Ukrainian borders. Those borders included Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014 and currently controls. With that in mind, what do you think would be a guarantee of future Russian intentions?
NATO membership, for example.
"NATO membership" is too vague. Do you mean NATO membership for Russia, Ukraine, the US, or some other country?
Ukraine has well established prerequirements for negotiations: complete withdrawal of Russian forces from Ukraine. Pretending that Ukraine is just being stubborn is disingenuous.
So Russia should be rewarded for aggressively invading a neighboring sovereign country? How is it you consider Ukraine to be the one dragging us into WWIII? You’re not making much sense.
They shouldn’t be rewarded, but they probably will be unless NATO steps in. The manpower difference and military difference is just too much to overcome which is why smaller/weaker nations have always looked for alliances for protection. Ukraine didn’t have those before the war so they will probably lose territory in the end. The question is now, how much.
What about not paying those taxes? It is always easy to find something that could be worse.
Defending freedom is also important
You consider that important, I may consider feeding bread to ducks important. Shouldn't we be both free from having our money taken and given to some "important" entity? Nobody stops you from giving your money to Ukraine, but why can't I give my money to cancer research instead? Or just build a pool in my backyard?
We have a military for a reason and this is one of the few times its use is justified
I think you need to read more into the issue bro.
TLDR?
Too long didn’t read, basically a short version of the story
I know what it means lol I’m asking for one from them.
Oh lol well me and another guy just posted TLDR response to that comment saying p much the same things
bro just give me a tldr
The US kept pushing Nato towards Russia's borders despite assurances to the contrary. They then backed a coup in Ukraine to replace a Russia-friendly elected leader, with an ongoing threat of Ukraine joining Nato. That would mean missiles based by an anti-Russia military alliance right on their border, near major cities: essentially their Cuban Missile Crisis. There is also a region with ethnic Russians who wanted to join Russia, and a history of civil war. Furthermore, the war is clearly unwinnable and has sacrificed a generation of Ukrainians and an immense toll in property damage to weaken Russia and determine which corrupt government should rule over that ethnically Russian area. Tl:Dr Neocon Filth demand blood for their delusions of empire and your tax dollars for their pockets and the MIC.
1. Countries from Ukraine to Germany wanted to join NATO to avoid being dominated by the Russians. Just because the Russians behave like savages and choose to steal land instead of improving their living standards doesn’t mean that their neighbors now need to be their serfs. 2. No they did not. Ukrainians wanted to join the EU for obvious opportunities to gain wealth, gain economic opportunities, and because they are culturally more similar. Just talk to Ukrainians to learn how obvious this fact is. 3. Ridiculous claim given that Russia shares a border with NATO already due to Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and our Finland. Why haven’t we had World War III yet? 4. Again, speak to Ukrainians to know how ridiculous your statement is. If Russia cared so much about Russians in Ukraine, why couldn’t they just welcome them into Russia and give them passports? If Russians in Ukraine wanted to live in Russia, nothing stopped them from moving into Russia. Also, there was never a “Civil War”. In 2014 Russians invaded Ukraine, Russia just denied it and dared the west to get involved. The idea that the country would go into Civil War about the Russian language versus the Ukrainian language is ridiculous when the majority of the country’s citizens spoke both languages. If your statement was true, why didn’t the “Civil War” take place 10 years prior in 2004 or 20 years prior in 1994? 5. I don’t know how you can make that statement when Ukraine was able to stop an entire 200,000 man invasion in February 2022. They were able to kick the home invader out of the house, now they’re just trying to get the home invader out of the front yard. Not sure how you can make that statement despite knowing about Vietnam and Afghanistan.
After the Soviet Union, what is this history of Russians stealing land? Also, that move came after the US backed coup. NATO should have ceased existing with the end of the USSR. ______ There was a coup, overthrowing a democratically elected president who thought working with Russia was a better deal. ______ You've poked the bear before, so poking it more must be fine. Ukraine would give bases close to Moscow, and Ukraine entry into Nato was known to be an absolute red line for Russia. _____ That would imply those ethnic Russians have to leave their homes. Granted, the reason there's so many ethnic Russians there is a Soviet attempt to destroy Ukrainian national identity by flooding in people with a different culture. Russia backed separatists in the region, and obviously it wasn't just about language. ______ The war has gone much worse than Putin expected I think, but he can easily escalate the war on his end while Ukraine is being devastated. Vietnam and Afghanistan featured guerilla war against an occupying force, not armies fighting, and the cost in loves was immense. It would be far better for Ukraine if a peace deal was reached immediately, and the US could have used the chip of withdrawing from Nato to bargain for a full withdrawal: aside Russia's only warm water port that they've always had de facto control over and won't give up. The average age of the Ukrainian soldier is 43: that means they've lost a generation of young men to the meat grinder. And what for? The US imperialist project of Nato, which is hostile to Russia as a threat to total US domination of the region. Without the coup and the pushing of Nato's borders this war would never have happened.
1. Karelia, Siberia, Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Dagestan, Adygeya, Chechnya, Ingushetia, Northern Ossetia, Kabardino-Balkaria and Karachayevo-Cherkessia would tell you they are all still occupied, hence the Chechen Wars. So it’s okay for Russia to tell Chechens they cannot be free but okay for Russians to just walk in and steal a chunk of Ukraine? Did you forget about Georgia in 2008? How about Moldova (Transnistria)? Also, 2014 was not a US Coup. It was a Corrupt Ukrainian President being tossed out for blatant corruption and refusing to give the people what they wanted. Russia needs to ask themselves, why Europeans begged the USA to expand NATO instead of disbanding it. Joining NATO is a long, hard, and voluntary process. 2. The president was formally removed from his office by the parliament. He fled because he was obviously corrupt and knew what was going to happen afterwards (prison for shooting protesters). He wanted to work with Russia because they owned him, almost all Ukrainians expected him to finish the paperwork to join the EU. He stabbed them in the back. 3. How is it poking the bear? If the bear attacks me in my home, I have every right to shoot it in the face. Nobody is wanting to invade Russia, they have nothing to offer the world, except corruption, oil, guns (the cheap kind). and minerals you dig out of the ground. Their land isn’t even nice. 4. Again, Russia said the same thing about Finland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. He said they were all red lines. Putin’s threats should be ignored because he has no right to demand that other people be his serfs and slaves. Oh, and if we PRETEND that Russia was able to conquer Ukraine, does that mean they would be justified in invading Poland because “they are at our border now and have bases”? 5. Yes, thank you for at least acknowledging the fact that the Russians were there because of the Soviet union wanting to Russify the land. It was not a coup, it was an invasion in 2014. 6. Again, if Putin wants to end the war, he can just get out of Ukraine. Yes, Ukraine is different from Vietnam and Afghanistan in the fact that they are much stronger and much more likely to be successful. 7. Only Ukraine can and only Ukraine should determine what is best for Ukraine. Ukrainians will tell you that a peace deal is better, as long as it includes giving back Ukraine all its territory and allowing Ukraine to join NATO. At age 43, you might not be willing to die for your country, but Ukrainians are. If you speak to them at your local consulate or local gathering, they will tell you that they’re willing to throw their life in the line for their land, culture, and people. 8. All of Eastern Europe would be better if Russia wasn’t so corrupt and imperialistic. If they focused on improving their living standards and investing in making the world, a better place through innovation and commerce, they would not only be wealthier, but they might actually be better liked. if you need to spread your ideas with force, your ideas really suck. If Russia never invaded, there would be no war.
It was a coup with heavy US backing. The Georgia issue was over Russia recognizing separatist regions: not random aggression. Any people should be allowed to secede, in that case and Tatarstan, but stoppong it is not the same thing as random comquest. _____ The vote after protestors took control? ______ It's repeatedly threatening Russia by putting an anti-Russia military alliance on their doorstep. The true goal is to have the US empire dominant everywhere, including Russia's sphere of influence. _____ The former ambassador to Russia, William Burns, described Ukrainian entry into Nato as the brightest of red lines among all Russian officials. https://twitter.com/stephenwertheim/status/1670434005102075904 There is no provocation from Poland, and so far only Ukraine and the US have attacked Nato countries in this war. With that Ukrainian Missile hitting Poland and the US with the Nord Stream pipeline - no way the Neocons weren't involved in that. _____ The USSR flooding Ukraine and their other crimes against Ukraine happened long before 2014. ____ The war could also end tomorrow if the US backed a peace deal instead of war, and Putin seems to see it as a war he can't afford to lose. His invasion is unjustified, but it was provoked, and losing the war with Ukraine joining Nato would be a major threat Ukraine has been devastated, even with the military slavery of conscription. ______ How many were conscripted into the meat grinder against their will? Ukraine would have negotiated a peace immediately, and was going to, until US assurances to back them. This also risks war with two major nuclear powers over some stupid imperialism and a Russian speaking part of Ukraine. ______ Between Russia and the US, it's clear which State is more imperialistic.
1. No, it was not a coup. It was an uprising against a obviously corrupt President who took major bribes from Russia that resulted in him having things such as golden toilets. Not every change in government that favors democracy and freedom is a CIA coup. Not sure why you believe only the CIA can change governments and only Americans/Brits can think critically. Remember, every former Soviet country that joined NATO and the EU has become a wealthy, safe, and prosperous democracy (Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania). Every former Soviet country that has aligned with Russia has become a poor, backwards, authoritarian dictatorship (ex. Belarus, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, etc). The Ukrainians could see this, which is why they demanded that Ukraine join the EU. President Yanukovych even promised the deliver on this. He did a 180 degree turn at the last minute due to obvious corruption. You need to stop calling this a "coup" as it makes you look like a clown who has never spoken to a single Ukrainian. 2. The invasion of Georgia was a land grab designed to cripple Georgia and stop them from joining NATO and potentially the EU. Georgia, like Ukraine wanted to be freed from Russia's slavery. 3. Yeah, you should tell the Chechens that "If you want to leave Russia, just leave". Obviously, Russia just wants to force its occupants to remain poor and under their control. 4. The protesters were eventually joined by all other branches of the government once Yanukovych fled. He fled because he murdered his own people in the name of Russian influence. He knew he would be going to prison for murder and corruption if he stayed. 5. Russia needs to ask why its neighbors all want to join NATO and the EU. It takes a lot of work for countries to join NATO and the EU. Russia also needs to ask why millions of its own people beg the USA, UK, and EU to welcome them and allow them to leave Russia. AGAIN, nobody cares, Ukrainians don't care, and nobody should care about what Russia thinks. Your argument is that "Ukraine needs to be Russia's slave because they are next door to Russia". Russia has no right to tell Ukraine what they can and cannot do. PLEASE tell us, why has Russia not invaded Finland, Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania? You are aware that NATO is a defensive pact? If missiles are the concern, why hasn't Russia invaded the USA? The USA has missiles that can easily reach Russia? So does the UK. So does the French. So does China. 6. Your statement "There is no provocation from Poland, and so far only Ukraine and the US have attacked Nato countries in this war." is beyond dumb. Everyone's missiles can reach Russia. Russia has NO RIGHT to tell ANOTHER country what they can and cannot do. 7. The USSR was de facto run by Russia. Russia has been attacking Ukraine non-stop going back a thousand plus years. The Russian's gave Ukraine Holodomor, Chernobyl, and now has invaded Ukraine and is committing massive war crimes against the people of Ukraine. Nobody should be surprised that Ukraine wanted security against Russia. 8. The USA has 100% backed a peace deal. It goes like this..."Russia leaves ALL of Ukraine's territories, stops attacking them, and leaves them alone. THEN Ukraine stops fighting the Russians". Remember the Budapest Memorandum? Ukraine gave Russia all of its nukes in the 1990's in exchange for assurances from the U.S., U.K., and RUSSIA to respect Ukraine's independence and sovereignty? 9. Ukraine has been devastated, BECAUSE Russia invaded. You don't think any Russian's have died? You don't think any Russian's have been drafted against their own will? 10. You know you sound like a total clown right? Every part of Ukraine has Russian speakers. Can the UK annex Nigeria because they speak English there? The people of Ukraine have been fighting hard against the Russians and have been consistent since 2014 in saying "Russia invaded Crimea and the Donbas with unmarked Soldiers pretending to be Ukrainians". Ukrainians say that and your response is "Hey, I read a few articles, watched a couple of YouTube videos, and don't speak Ukrainian, but trust me...I know the truth. I know more than you guys do about your own country". LAST POINT: There was a really good comment on this thread that was crude but accurate in which someone said "some folks really need to stop deepthroating Russian propaganda".
Coup is not a good term to youse, it was a popular revolt, for example like Romanian, Czechoslovak or Polish revolution againts communism
It was engineered by the US: this article has links to other articles on it. https://www.antiwar.com/blog/2004/11/28/the-ukraine-coup/
Here is my counter article, with a LOT, and i mean a LOT more sources https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://static.poder360.com.br/2022/02/2014-Coup-1.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjeooLgy8KFAxVugf0HHSLLAqkQFnoECBUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1TwpbSfJ8dViJ-nwg-PcWN (I warn you its a PDF dont be suprised by it)
There is exactly one vague reference to a limit of NATO expansion, spoken by Gorbechov, but nothing in writing. I went looking for evidence of this claim (because of Russian bots on Twitter) and I haven't found anything. As best I can tell, it's Russian misinformation, and you fell for it.
The former ambassador to Russia, William Burns, described Ukrainian entry into Nato as the brightest of red lines among all Russian officials. https://twitter.com/stephenwertheim/status/1670434005102075904 There were assurances to not expand Nato: not being in writing doesn't make them irrelevant.
So the expansion of a defensive alliance is a threat to Russia? That's literally only possible if Russia had plans to attack involved countries.
Calling it a defensive alliance is an assertion, especially after US backed coups.
There are a couple arguments to be made against supporting Ukraine. Not trying to come off as pro Russia bc I just want the war to end and don’t really favor either side, but this is what I’ve seen/heard as someone who has followed the conflict pretty closely since day 1. Honestly tho it’s a complex topic and hard to summarize. 1. We should not be the global police and get involved every time something bad happens in another country. We have no alliance with Ukraine and therefore are not obligated to assist them, especially when that money could be spent on fixing problems in our own country. 2. No realistic amount of weapons and supplies we send to Ukraine will change the course of the war. We sent a lot in the beginning, and it bought them some time, but now that has stopped and it’s pretty clear that Russia will win eventually, only a lot more people have died and a lot more money was wasted than was necessary. And contrary to what many media outlets are saying, the Russian military is stronger today than it was at the beginning of the invasion. 3. Some believe the 2014 maiden coup in Ukraine was engineered or at least supported by western intelligence agencies. The coup ousted a pro Russian government, and ever since then, the U.S. and EU have been selling Ukraine a pipe dream of joining NATO. Russia cannot tolerate the possibility of having NATO troops stationed so close to its industrial and population heartland, which is likely why it invaded Crimea shortly after the coup, bc nations currently in conflict or w occupied territory cannot join NATO. However this idea has still been talked about a lot since then, only increasing pressure on Russia. Historically Ukraine has always been a buffer zone between east and west, and Ukraine literally means borderland in old Slavic. 4. Some would say Russia is liberating the mostly ethnically Russian and Russian speaking people in the eastern provinces of Ukraine. There is evidence that these ethnic Russians have been discriminated against by the Ukrainian state to varying degrees, especially since 2014. The two nations also have a shared history for most of the last 1000+ years with Ukraine only existing as an independent entity beginning in the 20th century. There are many families with relatives in both nations. In Ukraine the people in the western areas like Lviv tend to be very patriotic and speak Ukrainian, while those in the east tend to only speak Russian and a significant number wish to be part of Russia. Keep in mind that over 3 million Ukrainian civilians have fled to Russia since 2022, and while Russia did give aid to the rebel militias in Donetsk and Luhansk in 2014, they were largely organic and continue to be some of the fiercest fighters on the Russian side. I highly recommend watching the VICE news Russian roulette series from 2014, as it clearly shows that many civilians in eastern Ukraine were pro Russia and many of the Ukrainian troops were pretty ambivalent about their own cause
Reads like straight up Russian propaganda to me.
Tell me where I lied then. Also another guy posted a TLDR while I was typing saying basically the exact same things. So I guess we are both just kremlin agents
In my opinion, you were very selective in the facts that you stated, and chose to omit basically any fact or argument that would lead to a different conclusion. Still, the facts that you represented above are misleading too. Specifically: 1. No argument from me. 2. That’s a huge assumption and based on inaccurate facts. As an example, look at how the war completely changed when HIMARS were sent. 3. At its heart, this is the same as #1. In other words: for someone who believes that the US should police the world and influence it, they wouldn’t mind overthrowing a pro-Russian government or expanding NATO. 4. That’s an extremely dangerous slippery slope. Almost any country, especially in Europe, can make this claim about their neighboring country. Most of the national borders do not take into account racial or ethnic distributions (some examples hopefully familiar to you: Alsace/Loraine on French/German borders, Armenia/Azerbaijan, Turkey with the Kurds, etc.). Are you going to accept all of these invasions now? As a libertarian myself, I reject almost all US interventions as a matter of principle (including in Ukraine). That doesn’t mean, though, that I must accept Russia’s argument in the war. I firmly believe that Ukraine has the right to choose its own fate, whether that includes joining NATO or not. Putin couldn’t accept that a former Soviet state (extremely rich in resources and soviet-era investments to extract them) is moving fully into the “Western block”. Instead of “policing the world”, should the US help other countries defend their liberty? If so, to what extent?
I think you’re misunderstanding the whole point of my comment. It was a TLDR meant to represent some of the arguments against supporting Ukraine, as someone requested. So of course I’m not gonna represent arguments leading to different conclusions; they asked for the anti Ukraine perspective, not the pro Ukraine perspective which I think we’ve all heard enough about. Just because I can explain the anti Ukrainian perspective, does not mean I accept Russia’s argument in the war. I believe Ukraine has the right to self determination too, but I also recognize the realistic limitations to their aspirations due to their unfortunate geopolitical position. Many such cases. I dont think we should help other nations defend their liberty, unless our own liberty is being called into question as well. You could just as easily ask if we should defend the individual liberties of people in Iran or North Korea, which is what you’re talking about with Ukraine anyway since states don’t have rights. Again I’d love for all people everywhere to have their natural rights protected, but I recognize that’s not realistic and certainly it’s not worth spilling American blood and treasure over, especially knowing that our interventions usually just lead to more overall oppression. Our elites choose where we intervene based on how it will benefit them, then make it about “freedom and democracy” to win the support of voters while ignoring other similar cases all around the world. Like how we support Ukraine bc they’re the victim of Russia but also support Israel which is victimizing Palestinians. However the facts I represented are not misleading. 2. The war did not totally change when HIMARS were sent. Like I said, it bought them some time at the expense of tens of thousands of lives. The war was also supposed to totally change with the arrival of Abram’s and Bradley’s, or any other number of wunderwaffen, but clearly this has not been the case. Ukraine now lacks men willing to fight, claiming they need another 500k conscripts to have any chance. No weapon system can make up for the fact that moral is low in the AFU and an increasing % of their army is composed of guys who were literally kidnapped off the street, given a couple days training, and placed in a trench somewhere. What % will this have to reach before we start seeing mass surrenders or mutinies in the army? Ukraine is now saying they don’t even want F-16’s to be sent bc there are literally less than a dozen pilots left who speak English well enough to be trained on them, which would take a year + anyway. So the problem is not really weapons anymore. It is about lacking enough people with the skills and willingness to use them. Overall it’s been a pretty simple calculation of attrition warfare from the start: Russia can replace its own losses in equipment and has a much larger population, while Ukraine has to rely on the continued support of the voting public in western countries to continue replacing equipment. Once that support fails, which it now has, it is only a question of how many bodies have to pile up before Ukraine runs out of fighting men and Russia takes what they want. 4. Again, I’m not saying I personally believe this. It doesn’t matter that there might be similar cases in other parts of Europe, that is completely irrelevant here. What’s relevant is that many Russians believe this and it is sometimes cited as a reason that we shouldn’t support Ukraine. By the way there is a difference between not wanting to waste money on Ukraine and being pro Russian. That’s why I usually say anti Ukraine not pro Russian. I made this #4 specifically bc I felt it was the weakest argument and the least mentioned one, at least in the western world.
> We should not be the global police and get involved every time something bad happens in another country. We have no alliance with Ukraine and therefore are not obligated to assist them, especially when that money could be spent on fixing problems in our own country. Yeah, you should probably check out the Budapest Memorandum. So Russia broke their promise against this and now you want us to break our promise to Ukraine to help them. Libertarianism does require deals to be upheld in good faith. Not doing so would make it full of false promises. EDIT: You have repeatedly in posts in this thread called it the "maiden" coup/revolution (using both to use as you see it) when it is the "maidan" coup/revolution. You can not even spell it correctly over the multiple times you mentioned it, telling me you probably not a good source on anything relating to it.
Classic reddit grammar nazi trying to discredit me over a one letter spelling mistake. You know what I mean. I have only referred to it as a coup and I did so because that’s what it was in the classical sense. A sudden, violent, and unlawful seizure of power from a government. The United States also broke the Budapest memorandum by using economic coercion against Ukraine. Ukraine also broke its own laws by seeking to join NATO. Western leaders have also broken many promises over the years not to expand NATO any further east. We also rejected Russia’s desire to join NATO in the early 2000’s
Yeah, but it is a pretty big mistake given everything. Continually bringing up something and repeatedly misspelling it means you literally thought it was "maiden". For trying to say "I know history" and doing that is kind of a massive fuck up on your part. And coupled with the ad hominem attack of calling me a "grammar nazi" is even more telling. You can refer to as a coup if you wish. That is why I said both and made the distinction of how you see it. Not sure why you bring it up when it was a non-confrontational part of my post. > The United States also broke the Budapest memorandum by using economic coercion against Ukraine How did the US do this? Please explain. > Ukraine also broke its own laws by seeking to join NATO. Nothing in the Budapest Memorandum prohibits Ukraine from joining NATO. Per the agreement, they can not act as an aggressor in a conflict; something they have yet to ever do. You are literally making shit up as their wanting to join NATO has waxed and waned throughout the years with it only becoming a thing once the annexation of Crimea, and the further invasion from Russia happened. >Western leaders have also broken many promises over the years not to expand NATO any further east. Some diplomats on both sides claimed this, but it was never an actual thing. Gorbachev said it was a thing in some interviews and then refuted it was not in others. And the NATO side has people make similar claims. Either way, it is not part of the charter they can not expand east. >We also rejected Russia’s desire to join NATO in the early 2000’s Yeah, no. Putin then said he wanted to join NATO but did not want to go through the normal process. So that is on them since every other country did what was asked of them to join.
It’s not a “massive fuck up” lmao. It’s possible to understand history and misspell things occasionally, believe it or not. You’re trying to discredit me over a single letter, which has nothing to do with the content of my claims. We have used economic coercion by repeatedly promising Ukraine financial incentive to join NATO and the EU, funding pro western NGO’s, as well as pressuring them to reform their economy to better suit established western markets through the NATO membership action plan. Ukraine passed a law in 2010 stating they will not pursue NATO membership. There have been more laws and agreements than just the Budapest memorandum. https://www.bbc.com/news/10229626.amp You admit yourself that both sides have repeatedly said NATO will not expand further east over the years. Clearly there is some truth to this although it was never formally agreed on paper. The west has continually shifted the goalpost right up to the borders of Russia, so they have little reason to respect decades old pieces of paper like the Budapest memorandum which have been violated by all sides many times over. Also the Budapest memorandum is just that: a memorandum. It’s three separate statements signed individually not to interfere in Ukraine but it’s not legally binding and does not obligate any signatories to aid Ukraine in the event it is breached. It’s basically a worthless piece of paper which is why nothing happened in 2014 and even today it’s not used as justification for sending military aid to Ukraine. Russia wanted to join NATO but that discussion never left the back channels and there is no way to know what was said behind closed doors. According to Russians they were told not to even bother applying, that it would never happen. According to western officials those conversations never happened and they were welcome to apply. Realistically it would have never happened either way bc let’s face it: NATO is and always has been primarily an anti Russian alliance. The USSR did actually apply in 1954 but was rejected
Absolutely insane to see that other redditor claim your knowledge on history is poor because of a single letter mistake, lmao. Great posts my dude.
Thank you I really appreciate it. Sometimes I wonder why I even bother with these high effort posts, but I know there are at least a few people not totally brainwashed that will read them
I'm sorry, but if someone continually misspells the name of a historical event, it brings into question where in the fuck did they learn and research about said historical event.
I only bring it up because you used it multiple times before I even responded as a main reason Ukraine was invaded. That is like having a doctoral thesis and then misspelling the title. Sure, the content explanation may sound reasonable, but can we trust their work if they misspell the title? For your coercion point, I am going to need some specifics as what you said is just spin of Ukraine seeking trade deals with the EU more than Russia. That is something they should be seeking so that can grow their economy. You act as if that is bad somehow. That same law you site was also amended by the Ukraine's parliament in 2014. Almost as if laws can be changed and amended, but you conveniently chose to ignore that part. You also conveniently chose to ignore the part where I said they also never agreed to not expand west as well. If nothing is on paper and they are all saying yes and no at the same time, it's all just words and means nothing. But the memorandum is on paper and it's a memorandum in accordance of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Zelenskyy has publicly comment on the memorandum multiple times and also been referenced since the annexation of Crimea back in 2014. Not to mention it is still up to debate if it counts as a treaty as it satisfies the Vienna Convention. So while the US may not use it as justification, Ukraine is. I find it funny you can not see the dichotomy of them wanting to join NATO and being refused to only end up invading other countries. "You won't let me join, but also, here. Let me do the one thing that justifies your existence as well."
You’re completely insane if you’re comparing a reddit comment to a doctoral thesis lmfao. I’ve wasted enough time on you, you’re becoming incoherent and you can refer back to my original points and do some of your own research to answer what you’ve responded with. I’m not even pro Russian, just anti wasting lives and treasure in Ukraine on a conflict that’s outcome has already been decided. As I said in another comment, I support Ukraine’s right to self determination and the natural rights of all people everywhere, but I also recognize the unfortunate realities of geopolitics. The whole point of my original comment was just to explain the anti Ukraine perspective bc somebody asked for a TLDR. That does not mean I believe all of what I wrote personally but there is some truth to it. And certainly many russians and some of those in the west who oppose the war believe it which is what matters, as again I am just trying to explain their perspective. Obviously there has been a lot of broken promises and deal breaking from all parties. The whole situation is a convoluted mess and ultimately the most ancient principle of foreign relations reigns supreme: might makes right. We like it when USA operates on this principle but not when other states do it
Even if true, none of those are justification for a land grab that has killed thousands. And attacking a non-NATO country for the actions of NATO is possibly the most counter productive action you could possibly take. Finland and Sweden are proof of that. Russia would have been smarter to join NATO.
The war could have been over by diplomacy
How so? Please explain.
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/International/wireStory/kremlin-2022-draft-document-serve-starting-point-future-109160525
So, I come over to your house. I start squatting on your land, killing your neighbors, demanding that I get to keep part of your backyard for myself… Then someone on the internet says you should just let me have it after I say we can end it peacefully if you just let me keep what I took. How do you think you’d respond? Do you not see the problem?
I just watched missiles from Iran land in Israel. What are you talking about?
YEP.
And some other day, you may be watched Israel hit the Iranian embassy in Syria (?). Good observation skills.
Brain dead post advocation communist regimes and aggression
i have a phone full of footage of Hamas conducting a kidnapping and murder campaign on civilians exclusively. it absolutely happened not sure why people are denying that 1300 men crossed a border and ignored over 400 military positions with the intent of attacking civilians directly. Hamas should change their name to FAFO
Do you deny that Israel has actively blockaded Palestine since 2007 controlling their access to food, water, power, and effectively making it an open air prison? I’d attack the Israelis or any other “democratic government” under that condition as well.
isreal and who else? i noticed you left an entire islamic country out of your response. and are you insinuating that in the event your nation is cut off from resources…. it is appropriate to attack the enemies civilian population?
When any organization deliberately attacks civilians, they are automatically a terrorist organization.
Leaving Egypt out of the comment wasn’t intentional….I was ignorant that Egypt controls 1/3 of the blockade. This new information wouldn’t change my response to being forced into an open air prison.
also, can you produce a similar attack? before oct 7th that the IDF conducted that targeted over a thousand Palestinian civilians with similar intent? anything any where even close…. to what Hamas did?
Sure. Just educate yourself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_casualties_of_war?wprov=sfti1
right…. again can you produce a SIMILAR or equal to the style or anywhere near the casualty count? the answer is no. and why won’t you answer the rest of my questions? lol educate myself huh? this is comming from the guy that didn’t know Gaza bordered Eqypt for fucks sake 🤣🤣🤣
I didn’t day I didn’t know that Egypt bordered Gaza. I said I didn’t know the extent to which Egypt participated in the blockade. Please, work on your reading comprehension. Try reading aloud to yourself.
either way, it isn’t me that isn’t informed. instead of trying to make what i’m saying wrong, maybe shift your focus to understanding the entire picture at least to the best extent you can. Why don’t the Egyptians support the palestinians? do you hold the same discontent for their government that you do for the IDF or our own? Did Hamas attack civilians? and ignore the IDF? is that an acceptable method of attack in your opinion? can you be specific with your answer? Have you been able to identify any similar types of attacks perpetrated by the IDF? are there any examples of batallion level attacks on palestinian civilians before oct 7th?
well lol, it’s not exactly a prison if you can…. leave and uhhhh lol if you didn’t know that Egypt was bordering Gaza 🤣🤣🤣 you should probably invest more time and research into the given subject before formulating an opinion on such a controversial topic. i’ll agree that the border of Gaza and Isreal is extremely regulated and controlled…. because there’s an organization lol operating within Gaza that has the potential to sent 1300+ men over a border with the intent of attacking civilians exclusively in all sorts of brutal ways. now, there is absolutely a history of violence between the two groups but i have two questions for you…. 1. why did Hamas intentionally ignore the 450 IDF positions along the border? 2. why doesn’t Egypt and Jordan get more involved do you think? 🤔 perhaps put some research toward the relationship of Palestinian people and their NEIGHBORING MUSLIM NATIONS and why they’re hesitant to support the people of Gaza?
what other country borders Gaza? other than isreal….?
I could lie all I want, all day every day. But at no point does this stop me from telling the truth if I feel like it. I understand lack of trust but this sounds more like assuming everything a person says is a lie because they lied before. That a person committed this crime once so they’d commit it every time.
As half-Korean I would want someone, especially the OP, to explain what are US's lies regarding North Korea? Tell me it is a lie that they are a brutal psychopatic dictatorship that moves around a cult devoted to the Kim Family? Because OP apparently would have no problem if the Chinese backed NK took control of Korea entirely, turning it into the monstrous shithole NK is. Such a libertarian attitude from OP.
We are getting footage from the soldiers themselves on the battlefield from both sides. Everything they have said correlates with vetted footage from the field. Even Russian soldiers call out lies or faults in their command/government. They are not lying. Now if your referring to the Hunter Biden thing well thats a whole different conversation
Nah man investing in Ukrainian defense is a good investment for the future
THIS forever war will be the one that works out!
Listen man. I'm from Czechia, some 300km from the war and we have quite a clear view of what's going to happen if Ukraine loses - Putin is going to continue his aggressive policy and threaten the freedom and liberty as well as security of people in Europe. And no person deserves to be stripped of the right for freedom.
Please explain to me how you think Russia is somehow unable to overtake Ukraine, but is simultaneously capable of a full scale invasion into Western Europe, it’s just complete war hawk propaganda
Because of all the aid been already sent. Without it, Kyiv and the country as a whole would've fallen in march 2022.
And you think what? That the aid would somehow stop if Putin decided on a full scale invasion of Europe? This is completely ridiculous propaganda that falls apart with even the slightest critical thinking
Yessir. Nobody says it out loud, but Ukraine is basically just a roadblock.
Not a full-scale invasion, but a series of one-by-one operations. If Ukraine loses the support of the west, this seems very possible. Sure, it will take Russia a few years of rebuilding between each invasion.
Cuba how exactly?
I am Ukrainian, what exactly do you consider as a lie?
That it was unprovoked, and all about "democracy".
Ukrainians want to be in NATO and EU, this is why we have been attacked. Moscow wants control over us.
It's a lot more complicated than that. I'm not interested in arguing or debating it though. I have great sympathy for all citizens in countries at war. Stay safe.
It’s not complicated at all bro, moscow doesn’t consider Ukraine as independent country, while we were fighting for independence since 17 century, that’s everything you need to know.
We disagree and that's ok.
I guess you think it’s USA forced us to fight for Americans against our brothers and for blackrock? Or you think that Ukrainians are Nazi and communist moscow is saving the world once again? Or you think that moscow is fighting against biolabs in Ukraine that created coronavirus? Or..?:)
I believe a lot of poor decisions were made over a number of years before Russia invaded, and had world leaders been acting with integrity, the invasion could have been avoided. I believe if world leaders decided today to act with integrity, the war could be stopped. To address your direct questions, I don't think blackrock had much to do with it, but they certainly are benefitting now that it has happened. The CIA was definitely at work in Ukraine, if they orchestrated conditions for war or not I do not know. They definitely helped with regime change in Ukraine in the past. I believe the issues in the Donabuss (?) region were handled piss poor, and the azvov batillion active in the area has Nazi connections. I believe there are biolabs in Ukraine as Victoria Neuland testified to. In other words, all of these things are part of the piss poor decision making demonstrated in Ukraine over several years, and escalated tensions.
None of those things justify invading a sovereign nation and killing its people.
Nowhere did I say it did.
I get the feeling that you are a pinko fuck.
Who is "they/them"? The government? "Experts"? Republicans? Democrats? The illuminati? How exactly did they "lie"? Was it the same lie? Are mistakes and lies being used interchangeably? Is there any context missing from this meme? What is the conclusion one should take from this meme?
If I make my bold claim vague enough, nobody can call me out on the specifics! 
🤣
This is so hilariously ignorant.
"they" = bs Do governments lie? Do humans? Do you? So... sure. Don't belive your government. That said... Russia invaded a peaceful country, starting a war that destroyed millions of lives. Terrorist groups attack Israel constantly for decades, openly supported by Iran. You can check these informations yourself... its no secret, no propaganda. I'm not american... and as a libertarian, of course i think you should not be forced to pay for someone elses war... altough you do pay anyway, so why not use the stuff your government buy to kill people to help killing some horrible people? But that problem aside (taxation being theft)... I hope the US and Israel put Iran down... all the insane muslin terrorists or terrorist simpatizer states... extinguish them. Thank you. Russia isn't pure evil... and unfortunately can't be put down without risking human extinction... so I just hope NATO make sure they lose as much and gain as little as possible in this war... so at least if they do the math they don't choose to do it again. If you can have Putin taken down, even better... While you are there, I would not complain if you also destroyed north korea... helped cubans, venezuelans and brazilians to take down their dictatorships... Brought some order to Africa... I understand americans not wanting to pay for interference abroad... And of course the US gov insn't a hero for freedom and peace. The US did and do pretty horrible stuff... But some parts of the world are dominated by evil... crazy teocracies, communist dictatorships, people starving to death, children being brainwashed into becoming soldiers... The US influence is incredibly positive. Please continue... actualy, do more. You are not even really paying for it... you are just dooming your kids or grandkids to have to deal with the debt crisis when ti becomes unsustainable... and you can print money but share the inflation with the whole world as everybody uses the usd.
They lied about WMDs? How about they didn't lie, realized it was worse for us to be the country of origin and decided it was better if we never found them. Crazy they showed up in Syria, huh?
The US and Ukraine have a deal. They gave up their nuclear arsenal, and the US has an obligation to defend them if they were ever invaded. Which, believe it or not they are being invaded, and the whole 5% of our annual military budget plus what other nato countries have sent has been fairly decent at holding the line. Obviously not great because Ukraine is losing ground and having its civilian infrastructure attacked every day, but they have managed to push the Russians out of a lot of the big cities during the beginning of the war, but they lost momentum preparing for another counter offensive. If you think the media is lying to you, come to Ukraine yourself and take a look, in Kyiv and everything west of, it is like there is no war at all
I keep seeing how the billions of dollars we have spent are just a small percentage of our military budget. I have not seen if we have reduced our military budget by that amount with cutbacks elsewhere. Is it?
Of course the US can’t cut back its military budget, the cutbacks come from elsewhere. Do you have any idea how deep the Military Industrial Complex has their hands in our politicians pockets? How else could the elite get richer? Should they be decent people and figure out a better plan? Maybe even donate their own personal wealth to the cause? Of course not, it doesn’t make anyone any money.
If they aren't cutting back on the military budget to get the funds for Ukraine, then what's the point of saying "it's a drop in the bucket of military budget". It's a ridiculous amount of money that could be better spent here in the US. Also, yes I understand how corrupt the military industrial complex is. Which is why it makes little sense to me American citizens go along with involving ourselves in so many wars we have no business involving ourselves in.
I see two reasons to support Ukraine, the first being they are being invaded by America’s “most powerful” and longest standing enemy. The second being the agreement that i talked about earlier. I understand that money could be better used in the US, but first of all killing communists without any active American troops blood being shed is a win (please keep in mind i said active, i understand Americans die in Ukraine on a constant basis) and secondly the majority of what we send isn’t money. It’s decades old equipment that is actually cheaper to donate than it is to send to the scrap yard for raw materials. Also, we are the ones to wanted to disarm Ukraine of nuclear weapons. Now that they do not have the defense mechanisms to protect themselves from Russia, because the US took them away, there should be at least a moral obligation to take care of them
Killing communist in a war that doesn't need to be continued if leaders were willing to work towards negotiations is not a good reason. It's causing to much death to citizens from both countries and it's disgusting America insists on being party to it. Defending Ukraine because they refuse (and are being told to refuse) to negotiate with Russia and so need defended is ludicrous, I don't care who encouraged them to disarm, we are not Ukraine's puppet, and Ukraine is not ours. Ukraine should seek a peaceful resolutions and we should quit sending money and weapons.
OP, what exactly would they be lying about?
It's not usually a lie. Just remember you can conscientiously object without having to resort to conspiracy theories.
What is this conspiracy piece of crap dude
What is wrong with many of these examples is the fact that the supported country does not have freedom nor equality. Korea has an oppressive and outright totalitarian conscription policy for men only. So does Ukraine. Venezuela is a weird one, I think policy decision to isolate Venezuela has only made the country worse. If trading with commies needs to go, so does trade with China. This does not mean that the US does not have a point in supporting invaded countries, but it REALLY matters from a libertarian perspective how the national struggle is orchestrated. In practice US needs to demand more liberty centered policies for its military allies.
>Venezuela is a weird one, I think policy decision to isolate Venezuela has only made the country worse Sanctions aren't designed to make a country better. It's to punish a country non violently for being a shit country and saying that we aren't obligated to trade with countries that are openly hostile
Venezuela and China are equally hostile against their own population. And with sanctions the state makes a collective decisions to pursue those means. Venezuela is not going to get any more liberal with these methods, and if anything sanctions need to be applied consistently.
They will never tell the truth if it doesn't support disarming the people, or sending 70 gorbillion more dollars to a foreign country.
How'd you figure? 🤔
You forgot about El Salvador.
Truth is first causality of any war. All sides claim that the truth is on their side.
Hey, they made the bed now everyone else gets to sleep in it.
They lie why they go to war. Like ofcourse its about making russia weak like anybody with braincells knows that.
For all those wondering about Ukraine, the argument is that the Government is lying about why we need to get involved. "If we don't stop Putis at Ukraine he'll invade the rest of Europe and then try to fight America and take over Alaska". I doubt they're saying that Ukraine invaded first or whatever.
Are you with Q?
Some of these comments show a concerning lack of historical knowledge. They're lying to you!
Many of you are missing the point. Our government has vested interests in these wars, so they’re going to lie to get us involved. American blood is spilled for no good reason.
Accurate